you seem to be just seizing on things so as to dismiss Anglicanism without actually having to take it seriously

It's as orthodox or not as the rest of classical Protestantism, but as a stand-alone system, Anglicanism is self-refuting. See what I wrote on my Anglo-Catholicism page about the English 'Reformation'.

Oh no, Serge! You will not trick me into mounting a general defense of Anglicanism that easily!

Aren't you trying to mount a general defence of Anglicanism in this thread Keble?

No.

The ongoing problem here seems to be a chase for an Orthodox standard that is uniquely Orthodox. What keeps happening is that principles are stated that are also held to outside of Orthodoxy.

The consensus problem is one of these. Consensus is in fact an ordinary secular standard. And what one sees in modern Christendom is that this is not happening, because issues of small-o orthodox belief have been married to polity, and therefore one sees a lot of sectarian divisions. Orthodoxy itself participates in this sectarianism by dividing itself from the other churches, and often enough they return the favor.

(Let me hasten to add that by "Orthodoxy" here I mean the picure of Orthodoxy being presented in this thread. I recognize that Orthodoxy is of the Church, and I don't mean to imply otherwise. To even have this discussion I'm going to have to criticize some positions which I understand to be more fully Orthodox than just the private expressions of Orthodoxy of which this disucssion largely consists. If the moderators find this too objectionable I'll just have to abandon the discussion.)

One can interpret Christian history in terms of the development of these divisions. Gnosticism failed, and Arianism failed (and its reinvention by the JWs is set against a widespread consensus about how bogus their scholarship is). After that problems arise. Oriental orthodoxy continues in spite of Chalcedon; the Augustinian West continues in the face of the Othodox East. There is a hollowness to a consensus that is acheived through deliberately creating these schisms, and Orthodoxy most certainly has taken that route. Indeed, there comes a point where the unOrthodox are going to tend to view the Orthodox "consensus" as a private interpretation, because of the tendency to simply ignore Western input (and indeed, as I find myself doing here, complaining because Orthodox authors can't get Western positions right).

Anglicanism makes a (basically unsuccessful) attempt at faking a consensus by trying to interact with non-Anglican positions. It's fake, of course, because the interaction ends up happening within Anglicanism (except to the degree that there are representatives of the different parties within Anglicanism, as there is for instance on the Catholic-Evangelical spectrum). And Anglicanism officially admits that this is unsatisfactory.

But that's not the way this discussion went. As soon as the issue of establishing a proper consensus in an attempt to transcend sectarian divisions was broached, the response was to ridicule the the other parties-- mine in particular-- to avoid having to bother to convince us. That is the purest expression of sectarian sentiment possible.

And the thing is that, at Nicea for instance, I don't think the intent was so much to create a division as it was to work out the best expression of the nature of the Godhead. Trinitarianism endures even outside Orthodoxy because the arguments do hold up when re-examined. That's a higher standard than the claim that it is what Orthodoxy teaches, because since it is true, Orthodoxy teaching it is defensible without any circular reference to Orthodox authority. Later councils often do appear to have the intent of making divisions, and as Orthodoxy continues to develop, old issues do reappear; iconoclasm as an issue in Christendom is never going to go away as long as images are venerated, because of the potential for actual practice to drift away from conciliar principles and into frank idolatry.

Consensus, ordinarily, is not an absolute standard, nor is it, ordinarily, a permanent standard. Nor does it live successfully with "No compromise!" Anglicanism simply stands in as one of the more demanding contrary theoies about how a consensus ought to be formed, and because I feel I can represent it better than I can other traditions.

But that's not the way this discussion went. As soon as the issue of establishing a proper consensus in an attempt to transcend sectarian divisions was broached, the response was to ridicule the the other parties-- mine in particular-- to avoid having to bother to convince us. That is the purest expression of sectarian sentiment possible.

Keble -

Most of your posts have been a paragraph-by-paragraph critique of my posts rather than an exposition of your own position, so it is difficult to know who the "us" is that wants convincing.

My comments were not ridicule, although you chose to regard them that way.

You suggested that consensus with those outside the Orthodox Church might be a positive thing, a thing desirable, and you mentioned the Anglican churches.

For many of us Orthodox Christians, the things I mentioned rob the Anglican churches of credibility.

They are not merely talking points or weapons with which to win an argument on an internet bulletin board. They are genuine objections to any dialogue with Anglicanism.

I am not an expert on the state of modern Anglicanism. But what I have seen I do not like.

I see the ordination to the episcopate of men who, in my eyes, are not even Christians.

I see the ordination of women and practicing homosexuals to the priesthood, the latter of which I regard as abominable.

My impression is of a body plagued by modernism and a general lack of faith.

Why would the Orthodox Church seek consensus with such a community?

Please, correct my impression if it is false, and tell me why we should seek such a consensus.

Logged

The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers.- Pope St. Hormisdas

I used to attend an Episcopal church, although I never became a member.

I know several Episcopalians. They are nice people. I am not judging them.

The ordination of women by the Anglican/Episcopal churches is pretty obvious without the Net or the newspapers. The Episcopal Church in a neighboring town has a female pastor. Her name is on the sign out front.

I have read a number of articles by and about Anglican bishops that make it only too obvious that they are not even Christians.

Do you deny that the Protestant Episcopal Church ordains practicing, even militant, homosexuals to the priesthood?

Now these things are ordinarily not my concern, since I am not an Anglican. But when someone suggests that a consensus among Orthodox and Anglicans is desirable, and that the Anglicans have something to teach the Orthodox Church, then these things become a concern.

For me, and I think for most Orthodox Christians, they absolutely destroy the credibility of Anglicanism.

Sorry. I do not mean any offense.

Logged

The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers.- Pope St. Hormisdas

I used to attend an Episcopal church, although I never became a member.

I know several Episcopalians. They are nice people. I am not judging them.

The ordination of women by the Anglican/Episcopal churches is pretty obvious without the Net or the newspapers. The Episcopal Church in a neighboring town has a female pastor. Her name is on the sign out front.

I have read a number of articles by and about Anglican bishops that make it only too obvious that they are not even Christians.

Do you deny that the Protestant Episcopal Church ordains practicing, even militant, homosexuals to the priesthood?

Some *Bishops* have done so and many have not. There are still a few American Bishops who do not ordain women and many churchs of the Anglican Communion don't either. Do you know of the All Saints Sisters of Catonsville Maryland? They are Episcopal Benedictines in full habit and do not hold with women being ordained. There are African Anglicans who are evangelising in the face of death. There is more to the Episcopal/Anglican church then what is in the papers.

Quote

Now these things are ordinarily not my concern, since I am not an Anglican. But when someone suggests that a consensus among Orthodox and Anglicans is desirable, and that the Anglicans have something to teach the Orthodox Church, then these things become a concern.

For me, and I think for most Orthodox Christians, they absolutely destroy the credibility of Anglicanism.

Sorry. I do not mean any offense.

What you cite is not the sum total of Anglicanism. Would the behavior of an Orthodox bishop who went off destroy the credibility of the EO? I am thinking here of one named Aftimeos Offiesh. He ended up marrying and not being a bishop and from him some Vagantes claim lineage. I'd rather go with Tikhon who before he was killed by the communists thought that there was something worthwhile in taking with the Anglicans.

No offense taken. How long, if I may ask, did you attend an Episcopal church and when was it? If you would prefer not to say, I understand.

Ebor

Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

As I said before, I am no expert on the state of modern Anglicanism, but it seems to me the level of apostasy in the Protestant Episcopal Church and in the Church of England has gone beyond one or two renegade bishops. I could be wrong, however.

I attended an Episcopal Church for a very short time (a month or two?) back when Jimmy Carter was President. I liked it. At that time I was an agnostic/atheist and was searching. I cannot remember why I stopped going: probably a flare up of cynicism; that was a chronic malady from which I suffered at the time.

Logged

The first condition of salvation is to keep the norm of the true faith and in no way to deviate from the established doctrine of the Fathers.- Pope St. Hormisdas